UEF T2 Navy & Some Other Changes

It still loses and dies to cyb and aeon while hardcountering sera.

The idea of just making valiant a variant of exodus is incredibly uncreative and is throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Give factions a way to play around each other dynamically, not just make each stage a “spam 1 unit all the time” situation.

Seraphim have a short range destro -> their faction focuses on killing priority targets and then moving out of the point of contact, constant micro of the specialized destro where you minimize disadvantage and maximize advantage

UEF has the short range destro -> give it a reason to exist by forcing other factions into going into it. It can’t submerge to avoid damage like Sera (nor have more speed as under this proposed rework) so you adjust Cooper to be that reason. Rather than minimizing disadvantage through micro UEF works on unit mix adjustments.

Aeon is the brute force destro spammer with highly specialized ways to impact navy thru other theaters (great cruiser for aa, great t2 fighter, great hover, great shields)

Cybran is the brute force frigate that forces you to engage via Salem and the Salem also exists to provide the antitorps to protect your OP frigate. Basically an alternate of the UEF where the salem is the cooper and the frigate is the destro.

I think there would have to be a t1 sub/frigate change to accomplish not spamming 1 unit all the time.

@veteranashe said in UEF T2 Navy & Some Other Changes:

I think there would have to be a t1 sub/frigate change to accomplish not spamming 1 unit all the time.

Aeon doesn’t want to frigate spam. UEF frig spams because their destro is genuinely so dogshit it makes spamming the 3rd best frig look like a good idea. And sera enjoys frig spamming against worse factions but also has a solid destro for dealing with pure frig spam.

What about increasing the damage of the Valiant to enforce its brawler capability,
instead of the mass cost reduction?

Because even a mass cost reduction won't change much if the unit itself sucks...
I mean, just look at the Spearhead. No one uses it, either.

But, getting back to the point - an increase in damage would help make up for the damage lost at range.

~ Stryker

( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

The unit doesn’t suck if it gets in range. That’s why you don’t adjust the damage. The problem is there is a grand total of 0 reasons to get close to UEF navy until a battlecruiser exists.

Then why not grant it more HP?

It already acts like cannon fodder, may as well roll with it since nothing else seems to be changable.

Unless you reduce the mass cost by a significant amount (More than 10%), I don't think that'll solve anything for it.

~ Stryker

( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

Because then the hard value you’re dealing with is the distance of kiting which in terms of navy tends to be the distance back to enemy navy factory. If you make the HP so stupid that on a map like sentons you can force destros back to their factories it’s insanely oppressive. If you don’t, then the adjustment hasn’t changed the reality of anything because they still die doing near zero real damage.

This doesnt even account for the fact the kiting distance changes per map so some maps they will be total trash and others they are insane.

The mass cost reduction is about making the UEF mix contend with a brute force mix of Aeon or Cybran or Sera. So long as nothing comes to harm the Coopers, the UEF should be expected to win. But the factions should have viable counters to coopers in the form of torp bombers or catching UEF in a poor position or even just trying to snipe with their destros (80 v 80 range and phim can submerge with more speed).

I see the 10% reduction making it totally possible for UEF to beat their mass equivalent force, I posted the forces above. If you really wanted to go hard you could make it a 15% reduction but at that point UEF is likely to win without even needing to worry about micro.

Alright, I didn't see it like that.
Fair enough.

~ Stryker

( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

Honestly I was kinda wrong, the oppressiveness would happen sooner. Cybran is supposed to win by salems jebaiting you into frigs or barracudas. If UEF destros trade efficiently against defensive frig setup, then they are insanely overpowered and require Cybran options to devolve into barracuda spam which should never be encouraged. Salems suck when retreating so as soon as the frontline needs to retreat Cybran is in a bad spot.

For UEF navy to be coherent it needs to operate in the sliver (against Cybran) where they can trade decently against Cybran frigs attacking into it but will lose if it attacks into Cybran frigs. This is ideally still hit by making them cheaper so that you get a mass concentration out sooner. Later Coopers vs Salems decide who gets the offensive advantage.

Exodus just kites back to base, simple as.

Sera frig is a subset of the Cyb frig problem. If UEF destro has the hp to win against Cyb frig all the time it’s oppressive against them too. Sera destro also has a way harder time getting fair value against the destro since it takes way longer for the torps to kill the UEF destro.

Should also say that a mass cost reduction results in it being easier for UEF destro to vet which is another advantage for handling nobrain frig spam.

@ftxcommando Currently, how does UEF handle other's navy ? What's UEF's gameplan, like on Seraphim Glaciers ? Does it just not have anything else than spam frigate and tech to T3 if Valiants/Cooper/Bulwarks are so bad in T2 ?

You go BC or you die

There are obviously ways to win beyond sheer navy efficiency, like locking people out of navy early, a snowball from map control early on/great first engagements, torps, riptides, etc. But these either rely on outplaying your opponent through means outside of navy gameplay or using theaters outside of navy.